Posted on 02/11/2006 8:33:45 AM PST by lawnguy
There’s no such thing as “chili without beans”. There’s just chili - some people put beans in it (and ruin it) and some people eat is pure. Chili by it’s very essence has no beans. You have to put the beans in the chili. Then you have chili-beans. When you eat a chili-dog, do you put beans in your chili?
Chili is chili with beans. Texas chili is the unleaded version of real chili.
Sheeesh.
That looks good. Of course, I'd have to leave out the beans.
See my rebuttal below.
And yes to the bean chili dog. If there aint no beans it aint a chili dog.
Beans rolling off your hotdog? What a nuisance! Then you slip on ‘em like a banana peel...’fore you know it, you’re just a bean-sucking clown, dancing down the spilled beanhall of life, clueless to the real meaning of ‘chili.’
A Freeper Chili Cook-off!!! I’m in!
I’ll plan a vacation with my three beautiful little girls for that
It ain’t real chili unless it can sear off the linings of your mouth and stomach and cause the UN to investigate your emissions the next day for possible violations of the chemical weapons ban treaty....
Beans are optional
you bean snob! :`)
but that’s just it! You don’t taste good.
yack.
chili ain’t got no beans..........beans is a separate brag.
beans found their way in chili as a cost factor in poor times...........
...used to be a restraunt in Decatur Tx w/ three crock pots full of chili........slabs of steak meat cooked just right by Mrs Castle............
... heaven on a crossroad to be sure
“She’s from NM and they have a whole nuther breed o’ cat for chili there.”
They put cat in their chili downt here in NM?
I wouldn’t doubt it. But I wouldn’t swear to it, either. ;o)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.